Within any industry, there are numerous private networks built around specific central service services and/or assets. As an example, a private network built around a financial asset may include numerous members of the network such as a central service provider (e.g., banks and clearing agencies), regulating institutions, and clients that request the transfer of the financial asset.
A main concern in private networks, and any network in general, is ensuring that transactions concerning financial data remain private yet traceable. For example, a central service provider processing a transfer of a financial asset for a first client would not reveal the contents of that transfer to unauthorized clients that are not involved in the transfer. Conventionally, each member of the network can develop and maintain individual systems that can privately communicate with a central service provider and/or each other using various communication protocols. However, the different individual systems leads to a number of additional problems.
First, each individual system can be highly disparate, thereby requiring a significant investment in resources to ensure that a system can privately communicate with the central service provider and other members in the network. Second, each individual network may significantly differ in their level of implemented security. For example, each network can provide different approaches to encryption, authentication, data masking, and the like. Therefore, certain systems may be more susceptible to being compromised which can affect all members of the network. Third, there is a lack of data resiliency, meaning that if a central service provider is unavailable, then the data stored with the central service provider is similarly unavailable for access.